Brigstock Medical Centre Also known as Brigstock and South Norwood Partnership

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

All staff had contributed to the development of the practice vision and strategy, which was kept under review. The practice was aware of the projected increase in the local population and was working with partner agencies to address future challenges.

One of the GP partners said, “we are consistently reviewing our processes to improve our service”. One of the areas they were focussed on was access, specifically the new telephone system. They explained that they moving to a new telephone system soon and hoped this will “revolutionise” patient experience.

The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff told us leaders in the practice was approachable and responded to any concerns raised. Staff also told us leaders modelled the values of the practice. Staff used words such as “supportive”, “approachable” and “welcoming” when they described leaders who they worked with. This was supported by access to private counselling services, provided by the practice for any staff who needed this for well-being purposes.

We saw the leadership team (GPs and nurse leads) worked with other practices in the primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area.

The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Staff we spoke with knew who the relevant lead person was for areas such as safeguarding, infection control and significant events monitoring.

Despite staffing capacity issues staff worked together to ensure the smooth running of the service. This included deputising for each other and providing support to each other even if it meant carrying out duties, they were not directly responsible for. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. Staff we spoke with confirmed they received annual appraisals from their line manager. They said that they found appraisals “useful”.

The provider had established governance processes that were appropriate for their service. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. Practice meetings were held every 6-8 weeks for all leads and partners. Nursing teams meetings were held every 6 weeks and reception meetings every week. In addition to this the practice held “coffee mornings” every day that all staff could attend. This was to enable all staff to input with ideas and experiences. Leaders also said it assisted with the general oversight of managing the practice. We reviewed a sample of minutes from all the meetings for the previous 6 months. Managers clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

The provider worked with other practices within their primary care network. For example, the nurses were part of the nurse’s forum which met every 6 weeks. Anyone could suggest topics for discussion during these meetings. The practice was also part of the Southwest London training hub and staff regularly attended events and meetings.

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

The practice encouraged feedback from patients. For example, feedback they received about their online patient survey indicated that patients did not feel it was user friendly. As a result of the feedback, they changed their online provider to make the online access more user friendly.

The practice had a quality improvement plan in place to help drive improvements in services they had a new online appointment system which was being rolled out.

Staff were particularly proud of their achievements with the group consultations for patients with long-term conditions. Instead of patients having one to one consultations with clinicians for their long-term condition reviews, the practice held group clinics and shared medical appointments with educational components. Staff told us patients valued this, and it had led to patients managing their conditions better because of the peer support they were receiving.